PUHO_C5_RipReport.pdf

Road Inventory and Condition Assessment

Pu'uhonua o Honaunau National Historical Park

Prepared By: Federal Highway Administration Road Inventory Program (RIP) Data Collected: 04/2014 Report Date: 09/2014

Updated Cycle 5 Report

PUHO

UPDATED CYCLE 5 RATINGS FOR THIS REPORT

The first Cycle 5 Manual Condition Assessment for Pu’uhonoua o Honaunau National Historical Park occurred in January of 2012, and the report for this collection was published and delivered to the park in April of 2012.

Following the 2012 data collection effort, the Road Inventory Program Automated Data Collection Vehicle (DCV) visited Hawaii in April of 2014 to perform automated collection on all NPS paved roads. While no Automated Data Collection Vehicle routes exist at Pu’uhonoua o Honaunau National Historical Park, a second manual condition assessment was performed during the 2014 trip to Hawaii and the previous Cycle 5 manual condition ratings were updated.

The 2014 condition assessment at PUHO incorporated new manual rating methodologies designed to improve the identification of treatment recommendations and pavement condition descriptions for Manually Rated Routes. These new methodologies will be used in future Cycle 6 collections at all NPS park units and were, therefore, incorporated into this 2014 Report and Cycle 5 collection of PUHO as an update to the previous 2012 collection report.

in

Hawaii

Pu'uhonua o Honaunau National Historical Park

Honolulu

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1 INTRODUCTION 1-1

2 PARK ROUTE INVENTORY

Route ID, Subcomponent, and Changes Reports 2-1

3 PARK SUMMARY INFORMATION 3-1

4 PARK ROUTE LOCATION MAPS

Route Location Key Map 4-1 Route Location Area Map 4-2

5 PAVED ROUTE CONDITION RATING SHEETS 5-1

6 MANUALLY RATED PAVED ROUTE CONDITION RATING SHEETS

MRR Pages 6-1

7 PARKING AREA CONDITION RATING SHEETS

Paved Parking Area Pages 7-1

8 PARKWIDE / ROUTE MAINTENANCE FEATURES SUMMARIES

Parkwide Maintenance Features Summary 8-1 Route Maintenance Features Summary 8-2 Structure List 8-3

9 ROUTE MAINTENANCE FEATURES ROAD LOGS 9-1

10 APPENDIX

Explanation of Condition Descriptions 10-1 Description of Pavement Treatment Types 10-2 Description of Manual Rating Methods 10-3 Visual Inspection Method for Manually Rating Secondary Roads 10-4 Distress Measurement Method for Manually Rating Primary Roads 10-5 Method for Manually Rating Paved Parking areas and Non-Linear Roads 10-8 Curb Inspection and Treatments 10-9 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations 10-10 GPS on Manually Rated Roads (MRR) 10-11 Geodatabase – Background and Metadata 10-12

1-1

INTRODUCTION

The Federal Highway Administration, (FHWA), in the mid 1970s, was charged with the task of identifying surface condition deficiencies and corrective priorities on National Park Service

(NPS) roads and parkways. Additionally, FHWA was tasked with establishing an integrated maintenance features inventory, locating features such as culverts, guardrails, and signs, among others, along NPS roads and parkways. As a result, in 1976 the NPS and FHWA entered into an

MOA (Memorandum Of Agreement) which established the RIP (Road Inventory Program). This

MOA was terminated and revised in 1980 to establish a new MOA aiming to update RIP data and develop a long-range program to improve and maintain NPS roads to designated condition standards and establish a maintenance management program.

The FHWA completed this initial phase of the RIP in the early 1980s. As a result of this effort, each NPS site included in the study received a RIP Report known as the “Brown Book” which included the information collected during this first RIP phase.

In the 1990s, the effort was again renewed to update and maintain the RIP data. By this time the computer age was upon us and a process was employed that relied heavily on electronic data collection and computer technology. A cyclical program was developed and the RIP completed two cycles of data collection from 1994 to 2001. Cycle 1, starting in 1994, was conducted in 44

“large parks” (parks containing 10 or more paved route miles). Cycle 2 began in 1997 and comprised 79 large parks and 5 small parks totaling 4,874 paved route miles. Each of these parks received a RIP Report known as the “Blue Book”. Cycle 3, from 2001 to 2004, was conducted in all parks, large and small, that contained any paved routes, including parking areas and, again, each park received a RIP Report and associated electronic files.

Cycle 4 was initiated in the spring of 2006 covering 86 large parks and several associated small parks consisting of 5,553 paved route miles and 6,232 paved parking areas. Data collection has been completed for Cycle 4 and all data has been delivered to the NPS.

In 2005, the FHWA began implementing the use of a Pavement Management System (PMS) to assist the NPS in prioritizing Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation activities. The PMS used by FHWA is the Highway Pavement Management Application (HPMA) and this software has the ability to store inventory and condition data from RIP and forecast future performance using prediction models. Outputs include performance and condition reports at the National, Regional, Park, or Route level. A regional prioritized list and optimization have been produced for most regions and the Federal Highway Deferred Maintenance is calculated via the HPMA.

In an effort to improve the accuracy of treatment recommendations and pavement condition descriptions, an extensive study was completed throughout 2010 that has resulted in changes to the RIP condition reporting method, specifically the distresses and indexes that comprise the

Pavement Condition Rating (PCR). It was determined that a better representation of PCR could

1-2 be achieved by modifying the relative impact certain distresses would have on the overall rating.

The changes that were implemented were endorsed by management at both the FHWA and NPS in October 2010. These changes will allow greater use of RIP and HPMA data for not simply condition data reporting, but also as a reliable tool for project identification and selection.

Because of these changes, the PCR Condition ratings reported in Cycle 5 do not directly relate to the condition ratings reported in previous cycle RIP Reports. For more detailed information about the changes, see Section 3 and Section 10 in this RIP Report.

Cycle 5 has launched in the summer of 2010 and will again comprise all parks, large and small, that are served by paved roads and/or parking areas. For Cycle 5, the decision was made to collect condition data in large parks on Functional Class 1, 2, and 7 paved routes only, as well as any new routes that were previously not collected. In small parks, all paved routes and parking areas will be collected. As a result, this will include 81 large parks with 4,459 paved route miles and 168 small parks with 529 paved route miles and associated paved parking areas.

Since 1984, the Road Inventory Program has been funded through the Federal Lands Highway

Park Roads and Parkways (PRP) Program. Currently, coordination of the RIP with FLH is under the NPS Washington Headquarters Park Facility Management Division. The FLH Washington office coordinates policy and prepares national reports and needs assessment studies for

Congress.

In 1998, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21) amended Title 23 U.S.C., and inserted Section 204(a)(6) requiring the FHWA and NPS, to develop by rule, a Pavement

Management System (PMS) applied to park roads and parkways serving the National Park

System.

FLH is responsible for the accuracy of all data presented in this report. Any questions or comments concerning the contents of this report should be directed to the national RIP

Coordinator located in Sterling, Virginia.

Respectfully, FHWA RIP Team

FHWA/Eastern Federal Lands FHWA/Central Federal Lands

21400 Ridgetop Circle 12300 West Dakota Ave

Sterling, VA 20166 Lakewood, CO 80228

(703) 404-6371 (720) 963-3560

15 235

3-1

Note: This park is classified as a Small Park. No Data Collection Vehicle routes exist in this park at the time of data collection. Therefore, there is no data to report for this section.

4-1

Route Location Map Key Map

Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Cycle 5 Collected Routes

0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.20.15 Miles

4-2

Rte 0402

Rte 0010

Rte 0401

Rte 0900

Pu'uhonua o Honaunau National Historical Park

Route Location Map Area 1

Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Cycle 5 Collected Routes

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 10.125 Miles

5-1

Note: This park is classified as a Small Park. No Data Collection Vehicle routes exist in this park at the time of data collection. Therefore, there is no data to report for this section.

Pavement Recommendation Condition Rating / PCR

0 80 160

Feet

FROM END OF HONAUNAU PARK ENTRANCE ROAD (NON NPS)

TO ROUTE 0900 (VISITOR CENTER PARKING)

4/7/2014

8,017

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE GOOD / 90

0.138

50243 PUBLIC

ASPHALT

6-1

Route Condition Legend – Pavement Condition Rating (PCR)

See Appendix for definitions and formulas Poor Fair Good Excellent Not Rated(0 - 60) (61- 84) (85 - 94) (95 - 100)

ROUTE 0010: HONAUNAU PARK ENTRANCE ROAD

Manual Rating

Pu'uhonua Honaunau National Historical Park

Inspection Date FMSS Number User Access

Surface Type Area (Sq. Ft.) Lane Miles (11' Widths)

Culverts Drop Inl

0 20

Pavement Recommendation Condition Rating / PCR

0 140 280

Feet

FROM RAINBOW RANCH ROAD

TO DORMITORIES

4/7/2014

7,218

RECONSTRUCTION POOR / 30

0.124

50222 NONPUBLIC

ASPHALT

6-2

Route Condition Legend – Pavement Condition Rating (PCR)

See Appendix for definitions and formulas Poor Fair Good Excellent Not Rated(0 - 60) (61- 84) (85 - 94) (95 - 100)

ROUTE 0401: UPLAND GARDEN ROAD

Manual Rating

Pu'uhonua Honaunau National Historical Park

Inspection Date FMSS Number User Access

Surface Type Area (Sq. Ft.) Lane Miles (11' Widths)

Culverts Drop Inl

0 0 1

Surface Type:

Inspection Date:

Paved Length (Miles):

Number of Lanes Lane &Width Information

Pavement Condition Rating (PCR) Roadway Condition Information

Structural Crack Index Distress Index Values

Route Summary Section Length (MI) Section Number

Surface Condition Rating (SCR)

Transverse Cracking Index Patching Index Rutting Index International Roughness Index (IRI)

Paved Width (ft) Lane Width (ft)

Roughness Condition Index (RCI)

Route Condition Legend – Pavement Condition Rating (PCR)

See Appendix for definitions and formulas Poor Fair Good Excellent No Data(0 - 60) (61- 84) (85 - 94) (95 - 100)

Pu'uhonua O Honaunau National Historical Park

ROUTE 0402: ROAD MAINTENANCE FACILITY ROAD

Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

6-3

0.23

4/7/2014 0.23

ASPHALT

Manual Rating

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6-4

ROUTE 0402: ROAD MAINTENANCE FACILITY ROAD

Condition Photos

PUHO_0402_7345.JPG PUHO_0402_7347.JPG

PUHO_0402_7348.JPG PUHO_0402_7349.JPG

PUHO_0402_7351.JPG PUHO_0402_7352.JPG

Curb Type

Surface TypeUser AccessFMSS NumberInspection Date

Curb Reveal (Inches)Area (Sq. Ft.) Lane Miles (11' Widths) Curb Recommendation

Curb & Gutter Type

Culverts Drop Inlets Gates

Condition Rating / PCRPavement Recommendation

0 210 420

Feet

FROM ROUTE 0010 (HONAUNAU PARK ENTRANCE ROAD)

TO ROUTE 0200 (PICNIC AREA ROAD)

4/7/2014

42,506

STONE

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE GOOD / 90

NO CURB AND GUTTER

0.732

50236 PUBLIC ASPHALT

LIGHT REPAIR

7-1

Route Condition Legend – Pavement Condition Rating (PCR)

See Appendix for definitions and formulas Poor Fair Good Excellent Not Rated(0 - 60) (61- 84) (85 - 94) (95 - 100)

ROUTE 0900: VISITOR CENTER PARKING

Manual Rating

Pu'uhonua Honaunau National Historical Park

4 10

PUHO: PARKWIDE MAINTENANCE FEATURES SUMMARY

FEATURE LINEAR FEET COUNT

BRIDGE -- 0

CATTLE GUARD -- 0

CULVERT -- 0

CURB 0 --

DROP INLET -- 4

GATE -- 4

GUARD/GUIDE RAIL 0 --

CABLE 0 --

NON-CABLE 0 --

GUARD/GUIDE WALL 0 --

BOLLARD 0 --

TEMPORARY BARRIER 0 --

NON TEMP/BOLLARD 0 --

INTERSECTION -- 5

LOW WATER CROSSING -- 0

LOW WATER CROSSING 0 --

MILE MARKER -- 0

OVERPASS -- 0

PARK BOUNDARY -- 0

PAVED DITCH 0 --

PULLOUT -- 0

PULLOUT 0 --

RAILROAD CROSSING -- 0

RETAINING WALL -- 0

RETAINING WALL 0 --

SIGN -- 1

STATE BOUNDARY -- 0

TRAFFIC LIGHT -- 0

TUNNEL -- 0

TUNNEL 0 --

Date Collected 04/2014

Note: Only culverts, drop inlets, and gates were collected on Routes 0010, 0401, and 0900 (MRP and PKG Routes).

8-1

PUHO: ROUTE MAINTENANCE FEATURES SUMMARY

FEATURE UNIT

BRIDGE 0 EACH

CATTLE GUARD 0 EACH

CULVERT 0 EACH

CURB 0 LINEAR FEET

DROP INLET 0 EACH

GATE 0 EACH

GUARD/GUIDE RAIL 0 LINEAR FEET

CABLE 0 LINEAR FEET

NON-CABLE 0 LINEAR FEET

GUARD/GUIDE WALL 0 LINEAR FEET

BOLLARD 0 LINEAR FEET

TEMPORARY BARRIER 0 LINEAR FEET

NON TEMP/BOLLARD 0 LINEAR FEET

INTERSECTION 5 EACH

LOW WATER CROSSING 0 EACH

LOW WATER CROSSING 0 LINEAR FEET

MILE MARKER 0 EACH

OVERPASS 0 EACH

PARK BOUNDARY 0 EACH

PAVED DITCH 0 LINEAR FEET

PULLOUT 0 EACH

PULLOUT 0 LINEAR FEET

RAILROAD CROSSING 0 EACH

RETAINING WALL 0 EACH

RETAINING WALL 0 LINEAR FEET

SIGN 1 EACH

STATE BOUNDARY 0 EACH

TRAFFIC LIGHT 0 EACH

TUNNEL 0 EACH

TUNNEL 0 LINEAR FEET

Date Collected 04/2014

8-2

R O

U T

E

R

O A

D M

A

IN

T E

N A

N C

E

FA

C

IL

IT

Y R

O A

D

Note: Routes 0010 and 0401 are not shown on this page because they are non-linear routes that have only culverts, drop inlets, and gates counted. Please refer to Section 6 for individual feature counts on these routes.

PUHO: STRUCTURE LIST

Date Collected 04/2014

No data available for this section.

8-3

PUHO: ROUTE MAINTENANCE FEATURES ROAD LOG

ROUTE 0402: ROAD MAINTENANCE FACILITY ROAD

FROM TO

MILEPOST MILEPOST FEATURE SIDE COMMENT

0.000 0.000 ROUTE BEGIN N/A FROM HONAUNAU PARK ENTRANCE ROAD (NON

NPS)

0.000 0.000 INTERSECTION RIGHT PAVED ROUTE (HONAUNAU PARK ENTRANCE

ROAD / NON NPS)

0.000 0.000 INTERSECTION LEFT PAVED ROUTE (HONAUNAU PARK ENTRANCE

ROAD / NON NPS)

0.013 0.013 SIGN RIGHT REGULATORY, SERVICE ROAD DO NOT ENTER

0.109 0.109 INTERSECTION RIGHT ROUTE 0400 (SEPTIC TANK ROAD)

0.235 0.235 INTERSECTION RIGHT PAVED ROUTE (STATE ROUTE 160 / NON NPS)

0.235 0.235 INTERSECTION LEFT PAVED ROUTE (STATE ROUTE 160 / NON NPS)

0.235 0.235 ROUTE END N/A TO STATE ROUTE 160

9-1

Date Collected: 04/2014

Note: Routes 0010 and 0401 are not shown in Section 9 because they are non-linear roads (MRP routes) that do not have linear referenced mile post information.

10-1

Explanation of the Condition Descriptions

The Pavement Condition Rating (PCR) can be used to indicate the place in the Pavement Life Cycle and the types of treatments that should be considered now and into the future.

Excellent/New: PCR of 95-100. Pavements in this range will require only spot repairs

Good: PCR of 85-94. Pavements in this range will likely be candidates for Preventive

Maintenance. Examples include Chip and Slurry Seals, Micro Surfacing and Thin Overlays.

Fair: PCR of 61-84. Pavements in this range will likely be candidates of Light Rehabilitation (L3R).

Examples include single-lift overlays up to 2.5 inches in total thickness, milling and overlays.

Poor: PCR of 60 or below. Pavements in this range will likely be candidates of Heavy Rehabilitation or Reconstruction (H3R or 4R). Examples include Pulverization, Multiple Lift Overlays, and Reconstruction.

At this time, specific Maintenance and Rehabilitation activities should be evaluated and recommended at the project level. Site-specific conditions that influence treatment type should be determined based on performing a subsurface investigation and/or pavement condition survey, and not be based solely on RIP data. Additionally, RIP produces a snapshot of conditions the year in which the data was collected. For further information or to obtain additional Pavement Management System’s data from our Highway Pavement Management Application (HPMA) please contact the Eastern Federal Lands pavement team.

Pa ve m en t C on di tio n Ra tin g

Pavement Age

Condition Categories and Treatments

Reconstruction

POOR/Heavy Rehabilitation

GOOD/Preventive Maintenance GOOD/PreventiveGOOD/P i MMMaintMainiMaiM i tenatena EXCELLENT/Localized Repairs Only

FAIR/Light Rehabilitation

10-2

Description of Pavement Treatment Types

1. Preventive Maintenance is a planned strategy of cost-effective treatments to an existing roadway system and its appurtenances that preserves the system, retards future deterioration, and maintains or improves the functional condition of the system (without significantly increasing the structural capacity). Preventive maintenance is typically applied to pavements in good condition having significant remaining service life. As a major component of pavement preservation, preventive maintenance is a strategy of extending the service life by applying cost-effective treatments to the surface or near-surface of structurally sound pavements. Examples of preventive treatments include asphalt crack sealing, chip sealing, slurry or micro-surfacing, thin and ultra-thin hot-mix asphalt overlay, concrete joint sealing, diamond grinding, dowel-bar retrofit, and isolated, partial and/or full-depth concrete repairs to restore functionality of individual slabs.

2. Pavement Rehabilitation consists of structural enhancements that extend the service life of an existing pavement and/or improve its load carrying capacity. Rehabilitation techniques include restoration treatments and structural overlays. Rehabilitation projects extend the life of existing pavement structures either by restoring existing structural capacity through the elimination of age-related, environmental cracking of embrittled pavement surface or by increasing pavement thickness to strengthen existing pavement sections to accommodate existing or projected traffic loading conditions. Two sub-categories result from these distinctions, which are directly related to the restoration or increase of structural capacity.

• Light Rehabilitation (L3R) - Examples include single-lift overlays up to 2.5 inches in total thickness and milling and overlays for flexible pavements

• Heavy Rehabilitation (H3R) – Requires rehabilitation with grade improvement. H3R stands for resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation projects. H3R projects typically involve multi-depth (overlays > 2.5 inches) pavement improvement work (short of full-depth replacement) and targeted safety improvements. H3R projects generally involve retention of the existing three-dimensional alignment.

3. Reconstruction (4R) is defined as the replacement of the entire existing pavement structure by the placement of the equivalent or increased pavement structure. Reconstruction usually requires the complete removal and replacement of the existing pavement structure. Reconstruction may utilize either new or recycled materials incorporated into the materials used for the reconstruction of the complete pavement section. Reconstruction is required when a pavement has either failed or has become functionally obsolete.

10-3

Description of Manual Rating Methods

In 2013, the Federal Highway Administration updated existing Manual Rating Procedures in an effort to better align pavement conditions for Manually Rated Routes and Parking with the Highway Pavement Management Application (HPMA). HPMA is the Pavement Management System used by the FHWA to store inventory and condition data from the Road Inventory Program (RIP) and forecast future performance using prediction models. HPMA uses pavement condition data (collected by the Road Inventory Program) to develop life cycles for pavements and recommend treatments to maximize useable pavement life while minimizing costs associated with maintenance and repair.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) developed a set of manual rating methods for pavement that are appropriate for Federal Roadways. Two different methods were developed for linear roads and a separate method was developed for parking areas and nonlinear roads. These methods employ a 0-100 rating scale and improve consistency and objectivity in the manual evaluation of surface distresses. They are compatible with ratings that are collected by the automated Data Collection Vehicle (DCV).

The first of the two manual evaluation methods for roads uses rating criteria to assign index values to each distress type based on a visual evaluation of severity and extent.

The second manual evaluation method for roads is very time demanding and is best employed on only a select set of routes which may have the highest visitor use and require a more intensive assessment. This method will be used for the Manual Rating of Function Class 1, 2, 7, and 8 Roads. This method is based on measurements that are recorded for each instance of a surface distress. These measurements are converted into index values using conversion formulas.

Parking areas and non-linear roads are rated similar to the first method shown above, however, there are some slight differences due to the non-linear nature.

The details and criteria used for each of these rating methods are outlined below.

10-4

Visual Inspection Method for Manually Rating Secondary Roads

The visual inspection method for manually rated roads uses condition rating criteria that have been developed by FHWA. This criteria is based on a visual evaluation of the severity and extent of distresses to determine the overall condition of the roadway. This method is used for secondary roads that are Functional Class 3, 4, 5, and 6. This constitutes the majority of manually rated roads collected by the Road Inventory Program.

Rating Section Lengths For this method, Manually Rated Roads are rated in sections. These sections may be made based on length of changes in surface type or condition as described below. The ratings are then aggregated to give an overall rating for the Route:

Rating sections should be no longer than .25 miles in order to keep the area being rated manageable.

A new rating section may be started based on changes in condition, width, or surface type if these changes represent a significant portion of the route (are not isolated instances).

If the road condition, width, and surface type remain constant then new sections do not need to be created unless the road exceeds .25 miles.

Rating Criteria For this method, Manually Rated Roads are evaluated using a visual inspection of the six distress types listed below. Each distress is assigned one of five index values. An overall Surface Condition Rating (SCR) and Pavement Condition Rating (PCR) are calculated based on these index values.

Alligator Cracking o Rating based on percentage of road surface affected

Longitudinal Cracking o Rating based on severity level (crack width) and percentage of road section length of longitudinal cracks Transverse Cracking o Rating based on crack width, crack spacing, and percentage of surface affected Patching o Rating based on percentage of road surface affected Rutting o Rating based on percentage of road surface affected Roughness o Only included if the overall roadway length is greater than 0.5 miles and the posted speed limit is greater than or equal to 25 mph. Subjective rating based on the overall ride comfort of the section.

Concrete Routes also receive a PCR rating based on visual evaluation of the following six distress types.

Slab Faulting at Joints Slab Cracking and breakup Surface Delamination and Pop-outs Joint Distresses Patching

10-5

Distress Measurement Method for Manually Rating Primary Roads

A more intensive and time demanding assessment than our standard method was developed for Primary roads that are functional class 1, 2, 7, or 8. These high visitation roads are usually accessible by the automated Data Collection Vehicle but in rare instances may need to be manually rated. The method developed is based on measuring each instance of a distress. These measurements are totaled over each section length being measured and are then converted into index values between 0 and 100 (100 being a road with no distress) using index formula equations outlined below. The goal of this method is to produce measured index values which are directly comparable to the automated Data Collection Vehicle.

Rating Section Lengths For the distress measurement method roads are broken into sections in order to rate. Distress measurements are totaled for each section separately in order to determine the index value for that particular section. The section length to be rated is determined based on the following rules:

Rating sections are between 0.25 and 0.50 miles long A new rating section is created if there is a significant change in condition or pavement width If there are no significant changes in condition or pavement width, rating sections are broken at equal intervals, typically 0.50 miles

Manual Distress Measurements Alligator Cracking

Alligator cracking is measured by area (square feet). Instances of Alligator cracking are measured along the length and multiplied by the average width of the distressed area.

The index for alligator cracking takes the total area of cracking compared to the interval length and converts it to a percentage. That percentage is then input into an index formula that yields a value between 0 and 100 (0 being the most distressed).

Severity levels are not defined for manually measured Alligator cracks. The Alligator Crack Index formula is calculated based on an assumption of medium severity.

Longitudinal Cracking Longitudinal cracking (cracking in the direction parallel to the roadway) is measured by length (ft.).

The index for longitudinal cracking takes the total length of cracking compared to the interval length and converts it to a percentage broken down by severity. That percentage is then input into a formula that yields a value between 0 and 100 (0 being the most distressed).

Two severity levels are defined for manually measured Longitudinal Cracks. Lower severity cracks are those with a mean width of less than 0.25 inches. Sealed cracks with sealant in good condition are also considered lower severity. Higher severity cracks are those with a mean width of greater than 0.25 inches.

Transverse Cracking Transverse cracking (cracking in the direction perpendicular to the roadway) is measured by length (ft).

The index for transverse cracking takes the total number of cracks (1 crack would encompass the full lane) broken down by severity. The total numbers of each severity are then put into a formula that yields a value between 0 and 100 (0 being the most distressed).

10-6

Two severity levels are defined for manually measured Transverse Cracks. Lower severity cracks are those with a mean width of <= 0.25 inches. Sealed cracks with sealant in good condition are also considered lower severity. Higher severity cracks are those with a mean width of > 0.25 inches.

Patching and Potholes Patching and Potholes are measured by area (square feet). Instances of Patching are measured along the length and multiplied by the average width of the patch.

Instances of full lane width patching cannot be longer than 0.100 miles, otherwise is should be considered a pavement change rather than a distress.

There are no stratified severities for Patching. It is either present or it is not.

Rutting Visible rutting is measured by length (feet) in each wheelpath. Rutting needs only to be visible for it to be rated.

Severity levels are not defined for manually measured rutting.

Roughness Roughness is given a subjective rating of Excellent, Good, Fair, or Poor based on the overall riding comfort of the section. Roughness is only included if the overall roadway length is greater than 0.5 miles and the posted speed limit is greater than or equal to 25 mph.

Index Formulas for Distress Measurement Method:

The method used to convert distress measurements into index values is shown below. The Surface Condition Rating and Pavement Condition Rating are calculated based on these index values.

Alligator Crack Index for Manual Rating:

AC_INDEX = 100 – 40 * (%ALLIGATOR / 15)

Where:

%ALLIGATOR = Percent of total area of section being rated that contains Alligator cracking.

Longitudinal Crack Index for Manual Rating:

LC_INDEX = 100 – 40 * [(%LOW / 175) + (%MED / 75)]

Where:

%LOW = Percent length of longitudinal cracks where crack width <= 0.25 inches %HIGH = Percent length of longitudinal cracks where crack width > 0.25 inches

Transverse Crack Index for Manual Rating:

TC_INDEX = 100 – 40 * [(LOW / 21.1) + (MED / 4.4)]

10-7

Where:

LOW = Count of the total number of transverse cracks within the section length where one transverse crack is equal to the lane width and the crack width <= 0.25 inches HIGH = Count of the total number of transverse cracks within the section length where one transverse crack is equal to the lane width and the crack width > 0.25 inches

Number of cracks is computed as:

Total length of transverse cracks/Lane width

Patching Index for Manual Rating:

PATCH_INDEX = 100 – 40 * (%PATCHING / 80)

Where:

%PATCHING = Percentage of pavement section that contains patching/potholes.

Rutting Index for Manual Rating:

RUT_INDEX = 100 – 40 * (%RUTTING / 205)

Where:

%RUTTING = Percentage length of rutting within the section being measured.

10-8

Method for Manually Rating Paved Parking Areas and Non-Linear Roads

Parking areas are evaluated based on a visual inspection using condition rating criteria that has been developed by FHWA. This criteria is based on a visual evaluation of the severity and extent of distresses to determine the overall condition of the parking area. This overall condition rating is linked to the level of repair and rehabilitation practices required.

A distress index is determined for each of the distresses listed below for Asphalt and Concrete Parking areas. The overall Pavement Condition Rating (PCR) of the parking lot is driven by the most severe distress present.

Rating Criteria:

Asphalt Parking Distress Types Alligator Cracking o Rating based on percentage of road surface affected Longitudinal, Transverse and Block cracking o Rating based on crack width, crack spacing, and percentage of surface affected Rutting and Distortions o Rating based on percentage of road surface affected Hot Mix Asphalt Patches o Rating based on overall percentage of HMA patches Potholes and Cold Patches o Rating based on percentage of road surface affected Surface Raveling and Bleeding o Rating based on percentage of road surface affected

Concrete Parking Distress Types Slab Faulting at Joints o Rating based on height differential between adjacent slabs or pieces of broken slabs Slab Cracking and breakup o Rating based on quantity of cracks and if slab is acting to able distribute load as designed Surface Delamination and Pop-outs o Rating based on percentage of road surface affected to include pop-outs, spalls and surface delamination

Joint Distresses o Rating based on sealant condition and concrete distresses at/or adjacent to joints

Patching o Rating based on percentage of road surface affected

10-9

Curb Inspection and Treatments

During inspections of manually rated parking lots and routes, the curb reveal and overall curb condition are evaluated. The curb condition is used to determine a recommendation.

Curb Reveal The vertical distance on the curb face from the gutter flow line or pavement surface to the top of curb.

When resurfacing adjacent to curb, the resulting curb reveal should be no less than 4 inches. Additionally, when resurfacing adjacent to a gutter, the resulting pavement surface should be flush with the gutter pan.

In cases where a resurfacing would violate either of these parameters, the surface may need to be milled or removed to adjust to these field conditions.

Curb Recommendations The following treatment categories are based on the overall percentage of distresses along the entire curb structure for a specific pavement structure. Distresses include spalling, cracking, loss of material and any other damage which prevents the curb from conveying storm runoff or failing to perform in its intended function.

Overall curb damage ranging 0%-5%:

o DO NOTHING

Overall curb damage ranging 5%-20% o LIGHT REPAIR

Overall curb damage ranging 20%-50% o MODERATE REPAIR

Overall curb damage greater than 50%:

o REPLACE

10-10

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

TERM OR ABBREVIATION DESCRIPTION OR DEFINITION

AC Alligator Cracking CRS Condition Rating Sheets (Section 5) Curb Recommendation Curb remediation based on overall percentage of curb distress Curb Reveal Height of curb exposed from gutter flow line to top of curb DCV Data Collection Vehicle Excellent Excellent rating with an index value of 95 to 100 Fair Fair rating with an index value from 61 to 84 FUNCT_CLASS Functional Classification (see Route ID, Section 2) Good Good rating with an index value from 85 to 94 IRI International Roughness Index HPMA Highway Pavement Management Application

Lane Width Width from road centerline to fogline, or from centerline to edge- of-pavement when no fogline exists

LC Longitudinal Cracking MRR Manually Rated Route MRL Manually Rated Line MRP Manually Rated Polygon N/A Not Applicable NC Not Collected PATCH Patching and Potholes Paved Width Width from edge-of-pavement to edge-of-pavement PCR Pavement Condition Rating PKG Parking Area Poor Poor rating with an index value of 0 to 60 RCI Roughness Condition Index SC Structural Cracking SCR Surface Condition Rating TC Transverse Cracking

10-11

GPS on Manually Rated Roads (MRR)

Parking areas, some roads, and other paved areas that are not fully drivable with the Data Collection Vehicle are collected manually by field technicians. GPS is collected for these routes using portable Trimble GPS backpack units. Paved campground pads and driveways are not typically included in the inventory or GPS.

10-12

Geodatabase – Background and Metadata

In addition to this park report, a geodatabase containing both tabular and spatial data specific to this park has been provided. All data disseminated in the preceding report has been obtained from the tables and fields within said geodatabase. The geodatabase can be referenced for tabular data via Microsoft Access or for both tabular and spatial data via ESRI’s ArcGIS Suite of software which consists of; ArcMap, ArcCatalog and ArcExplorer. Consolidating the RIP data into one database creates a seamless relationship of tabular and geographic data. It will allow RIP to facilitate easier updates and enhancements in the future. A geodatabase can be thought of as simply a database containing spatial data.

Many different tables are contained within the park’s geodatabase. A complete and thorough description of the tables and fields contained within this geodatabase can be found in the metadata. The metadata is attached directly within the geodatabase and can be accessed via ESRI’s ArcCatalog. The metadata portion of the geodatabase also includes data dictionary report functionality that formats the metadata into an easy to read report.